We don’t have a spending problem in government but rather a budget deficit issue, or so says Nancy Pelosi. Really. Read it here. Where does the left come up with all these terms like “they aren’t illegal aliens, they are immigrants without status”. And the “other side” uses code words which equate to racism. And Obama already blames the sequester, if it goes forward, on the GOP, even though he is the one that pushed for it. I could say that liberals like these (which is ALL liberals) have an issue where the synapse neurons are mis-firing, causing vagary cognitive thought, but I won’t. I’ll just say it like it is: they are dumber than a box of rocks. I never beat around the bush just to say something that makes people “feel good”.

Comments

Bingo. In years of evolution, these dumbasses are an embarassment because they’re trying to take us backwards. We’ve been there and done that. Doublespeak, ignorance and outright lies.
And then they think WE’RE too dumb to see them doing it.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

60% of current Republicans support immigration reform but when the same poll question attachs Obama to the idea support amongst current Republicans drops to 39%.

It may be that they know 0bama’s “path to citizenship” will not be sufficiently arduous.

For instance, I also support a “path to citizenship” for unlawful aliens — go back and get in line behind those who have been obeying our laws.

Another that I favor is an on-line auction. Those legally in line to come here can auction off their place in line. That way, the people most harmed by illegal immigration (those trying to immigrate legally) are the ones who benefit.

“I find that disturbing.” That’s because you do not possess the intellect to make significant bridges in logic. Obama lies and or fawks 99% of anything he lays hands to…therefore he’ll probably screw this up, or he’s outright lying again. In either case, it’s his own behavior that has pushed him into this little corner.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

The question was exactly the same. Only one question noted it to Obama and that changed the opinion of the lemmings.

That is very disturbing. How many other good public policy ideas are effected by this phenomena?

Written by Squiddy about 4 years ago.

Jack has it right – while many may support the concept of a pathway to citizenship, the President’s track record on this issue make most people suspect “his” pathway will be little more than a blanket amnesty, which most people oppose.

It’s semantics – surely you’ve received an opinion-taking survey, with awkwardly constructed questions – “pathway to citizenship” covers far too much territory – Jack’s response of “deport yourself and get back in line” is a “pathway to citizenship.”

I, too, support a “pathway to citizenship” – but I guarantee you it would be a far more stringent process, with far fewer loopholes than anything this President will ever support.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

Look, what I have brought up has nothing to do with defining immigration reform, a “pathway to citizenship” or any other deviation.

The point is 60% of current Republicans support whatever was asked in the immigration reform question; and when the SAME was attributed to Obama the percentage of current Republicans supporting it dropped to 39%. Are some current Republicans that blinded by Obama, so close minded and pissed off that even if Obama pushed an idea they would agree with they say screw it because it’s Obama? That is very disturbing.

No, we are not blinded — we see what 0bama is and what he has done. Therefore, we do not trust him.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

jack, let me make this simple. If an idea is agreeable to you and it doesn’t have Obama’s name on it, I’d assume you’d be for it. What I hear you saying is you don’t trust Obama so if his name suddenly appeared on the same idea you’d disregard it as not worthy.

Do you not see how ridiculous that is? That is the epitamy of blind judgement.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

This is even simplier. Here are the two questions and what I hear the novatown lemmings say is they agree with question 1 but not with question 2. That is very disturbing.

Q: Do you favor or oppose creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements?

Q: Obama has proposed creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Do you favor or oppose this?

Q1: “Do you favor or oppose creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements?”

YES. I favor having them return to their countries of origin and going through the normal immigration process. That is “a way” that I favor.

Q2: “Obama has proposed creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Do you favor or oppose this?”

NO, because everything he has proposed in the past has been unfair to those going through the legal process to come to the United States legally, and I doubt seriously that anything he proposes in the future will be any different.

The key is the DETAILS of his proposal. If his proposal is fair to those who have been waiting years to come here legally, then I would support it. What are the details of his proposal?

You’re really over-complicating this, B.O., in your attempt to score a point – the obvious point is, the President’s track record and inclinations on this issue are far too lenient for many of us, his circumvention of things like the Dream Act Congressional disapproval via Exective Order and his parties opposition to things like EVerify and 287 G funding and so on lead many to be skeptical of any “plan” he put forward.

It’d be a little like asking “Do you support this President’s policy on Israel”, and then being told “this President” is actually President Ahmadinejad.

The real “lemmings” will click their heels together, salute, and then answer both poll questions with a loud “Yessir!!”

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

Nothing complicated here squiddy. If folks were honest they would realize they have significant agreement with the current administration on immigration. Certainly there are negotiable details that can be discussed and worked out, but sure seems there is a very very strong basis for an agreement.

Unfortunately, I think the ARS is real. Regardless of what is determined to be a mid-ground, a strong foundation of agreement, a real chance to do something good for the country, a solution that is agreeable to most; the ARS takes over and folks will say fuck it, because Obama is on the other side of the debate. This is not patriotic.

That really is the bottom line here. And it doesn’t just stop on immigration.

Wolverine, I am getting the sense you are getting lazy these days and not buying into a fight. I think you are softening in your old age.

What solution would that be? No solution was presented in the questions.

Written by ACTivist about 4 years ago.

BE, there is only one paranoid person on this blog-me, so I’ll say it straight forward so that you can understand even with your eyes closed. The Obama brand is a turn-off. Anything with his name attached is highly suspect and always crap. When talking about Obama you must attach all mindless liberal followers to the brand-which means you. There have never been any good initiatives from his since coming into power. What is un-patriotic are the mindless individuals that concur and promote his lies at all cost to have the citizens of this country left in blackness, cold and alone. Your vision of patriotism finds no definition I am familiar with. Bad brand, bad for the country, bad for freedom. Do you feel it yet?

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

Ha. I don’t know about that ACT, Monk probably has you completely trumped on the paranoia scale. Unless you have more spiffy holes than he does.

Here goes the personal attack (no.1) and a diversion (no.3) all in one response.
Then there’s the usual insult (not mentioned in Alinsky’s work) to boot.
Cmassic liberal…all over the place when they start losing a fight of wit.

A jury can indict a ham sandwich. And this news is now older than dirt.

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

Older than dirt! You wish. Just broke last night and was picked up hours ago by local press. And I am elated to finally start to see some legal movement from this investigation. The cover-up has delayed justice long enough. At least it has shut Delgaudio’s trap for a while. About time for him to right some more checks for legal services.

There is smoke arisen from the Delgaudio investigation. I continue to be shocked that Sterling is not up in arms at their lack of a voice in Leesburg.

Written by IQ=98 about 4 years ago.

Supervisor Delgaudio is an interesting personality. I’ve never personally met him, but I’ve read about him. I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty, but I get the impression from the comments above that BlackOut doesn’t like or admire Delgaudio, and that BPM does like and admire Delgaudio. Is that right?

I am not as much of a Delguadio fan, but I do admire the rule of law…which is pretty specific, IQ… We are innocent until proven guilty.

And I expected it, and Sqautting Eagle proved it….they readily IGNORE reality. And the reality is that a Grand Jury can indict a ham sandwich. The trial and outcome is where the evidence will come out and have any real legal weight in any decision.

But what do you expect from one of the lemmings who wanted to thwart the election process and keep Col. Black from even running for the 13th Senate seat….when in the end, after all of the votes were in, he was the favored Senator that would be going to Richmond.

So true Barbara, that’s why I asked the question. Albeit, I admit it was confusing. With that said I have no doubt they will find enough evidence TO indict.

Monk, your a hoot trying to minimize the seriousness of a grand jury going after someone. I am sure the news is not thrilling to the effervescent Delgaudio.

Of course not a damn thing about the real substance here Delgaudio, just a bunch of BS to talk about ham sandwiches rather than the theft of taxpayer funds.

I also sense another flip coming from Monk, he’s NOW “not much of a Delgaudio fan”, Monk is steps away from saying he always knew the guy was a crook. I wouldn’t be surprised to eventually hear Monk say he uncovered the crime and counseled Delgaudio about the dirty deed. It’s coming.

/and darn, I would have loved to be offered the chance to serve on the grand jury.

Ha ha, BO, I’m just sitting back in amusement at seeing you stumble from post to post like a drunk. Really, a guy who works for a major litigation firm gets mixed up about grand juries? Shucks alive, and hardy har. Carry on.

BO, my lad, you get a bit more “whoo whoo” every day. I save my substantive commentary for substantive interlocutors. I mean, really, if a guy wants to talk grand juries and obviously doesn’t understand how they work, why waste my time?

Written by BlackOut about 4 years ago.

Wolverine, carry on dude. I am well aware of how GJs work, as I noted above. But I know what a chuckle you get out of calling me out on it during jello time, I’ll let it slide.

“coming from Monk, he’s NOW “not much of a Delgaudio fan”,
See- this is the failings of a moron on full display for all to see….everyday, it seems.
If I don’t have a dog in this hunt, he gets upset. It’s quite confusing if I were actually trying to read the diatribe of a sane man with logical conclusions, but this idiot can’t stay focused long enough to get a semi-rational thought out. He’s jumping up and down over the Grand Jury as if they’ve already indicted, and when he’s called back on it, he says “I knew that!” and starts dancing about how anyone who noticed his bullshit isn’t being “substanative”.

Hey, scooter, it’s readily apparent that you don’t know dick about any thing, and you’re that guy down the street who is a frickin’ KNOW-IT-ALL until you press him on the details , at which time he puts his tail between his legs and gets out of there.

Written by Cato the Elder about 4 years ago.

I know next to nothing about Delgaudio except that I like him because he seems to make all the right people go batshit.